Hmm
Does it passes TCK with your patch? Also wonder if we shouldnt get the impl
in some cases vs the signature. If tck are green im ok with it.
Le 10 sept. 2017 22:54, "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org> a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I'm running some tests locally using OWB and Instance objects. I noticed
> that when the injection point is Instance<Foo> and I attempt to get an
> injectable reference to the InjectionPoint, I get a very odd value for
> InjectionPoint.getType(). As far as I understand it, this value should be
> the type being injected into, e.g. Foo in my case. What I actually get
> back is the value of Bean.getBeanClass(). That makes very little sense.
> As best as I can tell, the following code snippet is the cause:
>
> if (ParameterizedType.class.isInstance(type))
> {
> ParameterizedType parameterizedType =
> ParameterizedType.class.cast(type);
> if (parameterizedType.getRawType() == Instance.class)
> {
> Bean<InjectionPoint> bean =
> creationalContextImpl.getBean();
> return new InjectionPointDelegate(
> injectionPoint,
> bean.getBeanClass() != null ?
> bean.getBeanClass() : parameterizedType.getActualTypeArguments()[0]);
> }
> }
>
> The problem is that Bean.getBeanClass() can never be null, by definition,
> but also should not be used for type safe resolution (we actually had a
> discussion about this on the EG list as I had the opposite belief). But I
> do believe that the else value is in fact what should always be used, I
> always should be getting the expected parameterized value.
>
> If you guys agree, I can submit a patch to fix this.
>
> John
>
